105 Replies to “Honk, Honk!”

  1. In a sane constitutional democracy this would result in the resignation of the prime minister and an election. But, this is Canada so I predict a $500 fine for Trudeau which will be paid by the taxpayers.

          1. You do understand that in Canadian legal system they will likely lose and then the state will demand they pay state’s legal costs?

    2. And according to Tamara Lich, the agreement had already been made between the truckers and the mayor for the truckers to leave.

      Trudeau then ordered the brownshirts in to bust heads to establish a precedent.

      David Johnston is shocked, shocked I say.

      Is Trudeau being moved out?

      Reminds me of when Big Pauly wouldn’t vacate the office when ordered and as such national media treated him like a conservative.

      Truduea would burn canada to the ground so long as he gets to feel important.

      1. A few months ago I was mentioning that the old Liberal big dogs appeared to want Trudeau out. Since then Chretien, Stephen LeDrew, Carney and others are popping up on the news, basically hinting that it’s time for Trudeau to move on. Hinting appears to be giving way to demanding.

    3. Freeland should be in Prison. Men’s Prison … where she can be passed around like the whore she is.

  3. LOL. Good luck with any repercussions against this lot. It’s just another day in the Gulag. And in other news, the State Duma has found that Josef Stalin has not been adhering to the Soviet constitution.

  4. Knowing the low character of theTurd and Freeland, I bet they will now ‘work and continue to work’ (like they often say) to change Federal Court judges. Some will retire (personal reasons of course), some others (pro-Lib of course) will be promoted. And issue will be re-tabled after.

  7. People of all political leanings should welcome this decision, as it confirms that freedom of speech and assembly are not just aspirational phrases in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but have legal weight.

    1. While the decision is welcome, we all know that there will be no consequences applied to the Turd so how much legal weight does it really carry? What’s stopping him from doing it again?

      1. Bad publicity, if nothing else. He would be knowingly violating the constitution for all to see.

        At any rate, Poilievre can use this for campaiging purposes — although he must use discretion, as he wants to appeal even to those who opposed the Convoy protests.

        1. Bad publicity???. Sure, it’s going to dominate the news for ,like ,15 seconds. You will find it in the newspaper just following the ad “farmer looking for wife with tractor-send pics of tractor. ” haha

          1. The Liberals’ polls have been spiraling downwards for many months now. This will keep the trend going for a while.

            And such things feed on themselves. People want to be part of the trend.

          2. Polling poorly falls something short of punishment. This useless prick needs to swing, not be rewarded for his arrogance with a lifetime platinum-plated pension scraped from the backs of the taxpayers he screwed over all these years.

        2. The Turd doesn’t worry about bad publicity because he owns the media. If they can’t spin it to some sort of Liberal advantage, they spike the story so the fewest amount of people know about it and those they discredit with all the ists and phobes at their disposal.

    2. KM, I agree with all your comments here. However, there needs to be punishment or penalty inflicted upon the perpetrator to prevent a recurrence. What I suspect is the case is that the judgment if upheld opens the federal government up to lawsuits for all those who were damaged in any way by the now illegal action of Justatwit’s government. It is in the sum of those lawsuiits that the punishment may be inflicted on the guilty. It’s very unpleasant if this falls on the people of Canada only and NOT on the people directly involved in making this illegal decision in the first place.

      1. At a minimum, the punishment should be unemployment for the perps immediately after the next election.

      2. Is the PM protected against personnal liability? In other words, will he incur punishment as opposed to the taxpayer? I mean beyond bad publicity.

        1. Individual government employees and politicians are immune from liability for their doing their jobs unless their actions are far outside of professional norms. In this case, I could almost guarantee Trudeau is immune from liability.

  8. The Liberal steps, Emergency Act version:

    1) we absolutely need this power, but won’t use it
    2) we absolutely had to use it, but just once, for a bit
    3) all done, everyone go home
    4) we’re done, on to better things
    5) we never asked for the power we didn’t want to use
    6) its all Harper’s fault

  10. Release the Coutts Political Prisoners immediately and pay each of them more than was paid to Omar Khadr. Is it too much to ask that Trudeau pay each of them $1,000,000 out of his PERSONAL fortune? Think of it as the price for being a Totalitarian A$$hole!

  12. So, when do the arrests for assault, battery, theft, destruction of private property, etc start?

    I bet that they won’t even release the Coutts political prisoners.

  13. Will the Grits appeal? Can they? Sure hope so.

    More please I say to show how these collectivist clowns declared martial law on every Canadian with their crime in search of evidence Act, and later revealed their cowardice withdrawing the bill from the Senate.

    They gave themselves power extra judiciously and expected our PM to act judiciously in its application?
    When we know they did abuse it, along with their banker lackeys, who still await retribution.

    Never forget the Justice Minister’s answer to a question that only “Trump supporters” should be concerned with this arbitrary breach of their rights, for which the Charter (slam dunk folks) expressly forbid.

    The only saving grace of this debacle is Trudeau’s “unacceptable views” approach began his political descent.

      1. I just had a strong feeling Turdo would go after the truckers so I never gave them any money but I did quadruple the amount I was giving the JCCF each month. Best investment I could possibly make for the future of my grandchildren!

  15. So how about the government using hacked/stolen credit card information to seize the bank accounts of Canadian citizens? If the invocation of the Emergencies Act was unlawful and unreasonable and unconstitutional, then how about all of the subsequent acts of the government that were grounded in powers that existed only because the Emergencies Act had been invoked? Fruit of the poisoned tree, and all that. Asking for a friend.

    1. Good questions. What the judgment means is that, if upheld on appeal, the Government of Canada is legally liable for any damages found under civil lawsuit. Lamentably, Justatwit and his fellow criminals will be personally protected from incurring penalties. This will fall only on the Government of Canada.

      To get a favourable ruling, the plaintiff will have to show damage.

      1. 1oo,00o percent right on Pappy!!!!
        As I recall, the commie regime in power asked the banks to freeze accounts. The banks said we would be happy to freeze accounts if you invoked an emergency to give us cover to freeze accounts.
        Canada is a freezing commie shit hole.

  16. TurdHole will just take this to the Lieberal friendly SCOC. This sham of a court is known for re-writing the constitution. (See the Delwyn Vrend case.)

    2. The Constitution has nothing to do with this. SCOC can only hear it as an appeal. And in Canada, for a successful appeal, the Government will have to show that the ruling judge being appealed made “an error in Law.”

      That is a very difficult legal test.

      1. Media reaction so far ranks from “unconstitutional” (tough) to “unreasonable” (more than charitable) to the more accurate “Charter violation.” This is big loss. Wonder what daddy Trudeau would think of this?

        Yes, the Grits have said they will appeal, that this was within their powers and the law, but they or you shouldn’t assume the SCOC will side with the federal government, despite their deferential attitude of late.

        After all the Federal Court is in place for just such jurisdictional issues, maybe the SCOC defers to them?

        I believe the SCOC will come to the same conclusion this government did when they withdrew the bill from the Senate – this is a no brainer breach of the Charter, and also in my humble and Politics BA opinion, overreach is an understatement – the action was arbitrary and utterly unnecessary especially given the government could have sought and probably obtained an injunction to remove the Convoy from the Hill.

        But – they never did. Why not? For that, a pox on all their Houses.
        Instead they imposed their power on patriotic Canadians, grannies and “Trump supporters.”
        What they did do was get access to bank records, to seize and freeze accounts of the “fringe minority.”
        Let’s never forget their jackboot tactics then and their Stalinist “criminals have nothing to hide” despotism.

        1. Violate the “constitution”, hell read it, it was written so it could be overruled at any time.

          1. Well the “Emergencies Act” as written certainly allows that….which is why the Act must be rewritten. Never again should a totalitarian like Trudeau be allowed to walk over the Charter….perhaps there needs to be some kind of bar that needs to be met before the Act can be invoked whether it be to the Supreme Court or perhaps the approval of all provincial legislatures. But it can never again be in the hands of people like Trudeau.

      2. I realise that. However, the SCOC in the Vrend case “wrote in” non-existent words into the constitution in order to make the Federal Court’s decision erroneous.

      3. cgh

        The SOC are supposed to deal with “errors in law”, but the SOC has been known to make new law.

        Personally, I hope one of two things happens:
        a) the SOC declines to hear the case
        b) the SOC hears the case and then comes down even harder against the Trudeau administration than the Federal Court did.

      4. They have already said they will appeal.
        And with a Liberal SCOC it seems almost guaranteed this ruling will be reversed.

  17. I’m reading the decision, it was big to the judge on AB participating in case and opposing GoC’s actions.
    Where was Moe? We know the rest of the provinces are gutless. This looks very good on AB and bad on SK.

    1. Facts never stood in the way of that the a-hole (a former undergrad classmate of mine – surprised the loud-mouthed, ignoamus f*ckwit even made it into law school)

  19. So what’s the consequence – a $200 fine paid for by the taxpayers?

    How about we freeze his bank account, revoke his passport, and throw him in jail for 27 months without bail.

    1. The consequence will come in the host of plaintiffs pleading damage in a host of civil actions against the government of Canada.

      1. That is not a consequence for Trudeau, but for the taxpayer. What happens to Trudeau personally? nada.

  20. So what? Pennsylvania Supreme Court also ruled the 2020 election illegal when they didn’t properly change the voting laws in the State Legislature.

    2. Yes, I do as well. They are a federally registered charity and you get a tax receipt for donations over $50.

    4. RN – absolutely, it is imperative. They have already announced they will appeal. They government is not restrained by monetary considerations. They unlimited access to our money and the fight is far from over.

  23. Ford said he stands shoulder to shoulder with Trudeau. Shit next to shit. It all smells like shit.

    1. The process is the punishment.

      The next time Trudeau decides to implement the emergencies act, he will do so knowing that it will require 2-1/2 years for a judgment of his actions to be rendered. By that time, the coup will be long over.

  25. I note that Poilievre couldn’t restrain himself, and uttered this stunning bit of hypocrisy:

    “He caused the crisis by dividing people. Then he violated Charter rights to illegally suppress citizens. As PM, I will unite our country for freedom.”

    Recall if you will that Poilievre and his “Conservatives” voted unanimously, and in lockstep with both the NDP and the Libs, to strip away our rights during covid. EVERY SINGLE ONE of the 338 MPs voted for this.

    Many of us noted PP’s lukewarm finger in the wind support for the Freedom Convoy, too.

    4. I must correct you- the Conservatives and the Bloc did not vote with LIberals and NDP to invoke the EA. ie Conservatives voted against it. reply is to weyland yutani

      1. Exactly…not sure where Wey got that info but:
        The motion to confirm the declaration of emergency passed 185-151, with the New Democrats voting in favour alongside the minority Liberal government.
        The Bloc and the Conservatives voted AGAINST IT.

        The NDP are just as much to blame.

  27. Here are the money lines from the court decision:
    [255] For these reasons, I conclude that there was no national emergency justifying the invocation of the Emergencies Act and the decision to do so was therefore unreasonable and ultra vires. Should I be found to have erred in that conclusion, I will proceed to discuss the threshold requirement that for a public order emergency to be declared it must meet the definition set out in section 16 of the Act.
    [297] For these reasons, I am also satisfied that the GIC did not have reasonable grounds to believe that a threat to national security existed within the meaning of the Act and the decision was ultra vires.
    [309] … To the extent that peaceful protestors did not participate in the actions of those disrupting the peace, their freedom of expression was infringed.
    [340] In requiring the financial institutions to act on the instructions of the RCMP, in my view, the Economic Order effectively enlisted them as subordinates of the government …
    [341] I find that the failure to require that some objective standard be satisfied before the accounts were frozen breached s. 8. Whether that could be justified in the circumstances depends on a section 1 analysis.
    [359] Having found that the infringements of Charter sections 2(b) and 8 were not minimally impairing, I find that they were not justified under section 1.
    [372] I have concluded that the decision to issue the Proclamation does not bear the hallmarks of reasonableness – justification, transparency and intelligibility – and was not justified in relation to the relevant factual and legal constraints that were required to be taken into consideration. In my view, there can be only one reasonable interpretation of EA sections 3 and 17 and paragraph 2(c) of the CSIS Act and the Applicants have established that the legal constraints on the discretion of the GIC to declare a public order emergency were not satisfied

    2. I welcome the judge’s conclusion and this excerpt is about the most sensible part of the document. The rest of it is hard reading, though, as the judge lives in a world where the full liberal narrative is in effect.

      Diagalon flags aren’t a podcaster’s merch, no they are indicia of right wing extremist danger. The Ottawa protest was a “blockade” and “occupation” that blockaded pedestrian access to the downtown and blockaded businesses. Anyone who spent the briefest time walking around downtown Ottawa during the convoy knows that no pedestrians were blockaded and you were perfectly free to walk in to any business to grab a shawarma or whatever they were offering.

      Some businesses did indeed close, but that was because they fainted at the thought of an unmasked, unvaccinated trucker crossing their door. So the snooty coffee shops like Happy Goat closed but McDonald’s, shawarma shops and the hotels were doing the best business they had seen in two years.

      1. Still, it’s nice to see even an obviously liberal judge was reluctantly persuaded by the evidence presented by the JCCF.

        And I’m happy to see that my contributions to the JCCF are being well used.

  28. Justice delayed is justice denied.

    When the lawsuits start, know your sovereign rights if ever called for jury duty, and keep in mind who closed ranks to oppose your freedoms, I think it was all but 1 federal MP, and she was simply out of Ottawa that day… It may be helpful to your spirit to call your MP and “respectfully let them know how you feel”, and who you’ll be donating to in the future.

    Deputy PM Freeland responds to this federal loss at the courts citing fear of loss of “public safety” and security, and in my opinion she’s “not being truthful” on this topic, similar to all topics she opens her gaping pie hole on. She may be advised to not do this by her dept. lawyers, I expect she will regardless of consequences, and good luck with the SCOC showing where the Federal Court made any errors in law. Not that facts have anything to do with Freeland and the rest of her ilk with the #Libranos

    https://www.ctvnews.ca/video/c2852829-freeland–feds-will-appeal-court-ruling

    I find her response revolting, and simply cannot say more about it without triggering the SDA filter.

    Last year I attended a 2 days contractor’s seminar with Jeremiah Jost (and met his wife and child who were visiting Calgary then) and who is named as the primary complainant in the JCCF legal file, and realised he is amongst the most decent and freedom loving of people whom I’ve met in the trades.
    Congratulations to him for this win for freedom.

  29. I said to my wife/’supervisor’, before the convoy arrived, that if the Turd would just walk out of Parliament Hill alone, no entourage, no security, nothing, they might reach an almost immediate truce/understanding/compromise.

    Knowing, of course, that it’d never happen.

  30. Hoping, praying that this decision is the final catalyst for the removal of Trudeau to the dustbin of history. It cannot come soon enough.

  31. From what I understand, the banks enforced this based on a public statement by the Minister… but I stand to be corrected on this.
    I would live to see a timeline of when anything official was issued by the government/a court and when accounts were frozen. If the banks froze the accounts before the gov issued paperwork then the banks will be the ones on the hook.

  32. Hope this stands up. It opens the door for damages litigation, not just against the Turd government, but, against the banks for substantial damages to anyone whose accounts were frozen, essentially destroying people’s businesses and livelihoods.
    Couldn’t happen to a better bunch of shysters.

  33. If I knew it was illegal, everybody else did.. This day was coming and it got everything to do with those men that are still in jail.. You know the 4 guys who were going to take over Canada with 12 guns and a pickup truck?..

    They are held to lend support to the governments position.. Political prisoners in every sense of the word..

    Slow walk the ruling, slow walk the appeal and slow walk the public’s attention span.. Don’t forget all of Parliament signed off on it.. Trudeau was just the head rodent..

  35. Danielle is right too.

    The response from the Gov’t of Alberta:

    https://twitter.com/ABDanielleSmith/status/1749900710567973189

    ““Since day one, Alberta has been clear that the federal government’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act during the COVID-19 pandemic violated the constitutionally guaranteed rights of Albertans and gave the federal government the ability to seize property without due process of law.”
    …
    “Today is another example of the Federal Court ruling against the Federal Government’s unconstitutional practices. Whether it’s today’s court decision, or their defeat on plastics or the Impact Assessment Act, it is clear the Trudeau Liberal Government simply does not understand or respect the Constitution of Canada.

    “We are disappointed that the federal government has indicated they will be appealing the decision. The unnecessary use of the Emergencies Act set a dark and dangerous precedent, and if the federal government will not acknowledge that fact, Alberta will continue to champion the Charter rights of Albertans and all Canadians.

    “We want to thank the Canadian Constitution Foundation and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, as well as all the parties involved in initiating this legal challenge, for their dedication to protecting and upholding the rights and freedoms of Canadians.

    “We continue to review the Federal Court’s reasons and will be prepared to intervene in the Federal appeal should the Trudeau government move ahead.”

  36. “Alberta will continue to champion the Charter rights of Albertans and all Canadians.”

    Sing it to your Crown Attorneys, Danielle. The ones who persecute preachers and the Coutts Four.

    1. Exactly.
      Talk is as cheap as Doug Ford is fat.
      And Crown Prosecutors are as likeable as birthday cake made out of meadow muffins.

    2. The forum for fighting this out is the courts, if the Premier interferes in a court case the calls for her resignation would be loud and clear and she’d lose “taking the high road” to the Turd PM. The same for the Coutts 4, the best those could hope for is a sovereign jury finding them all not guilty and happiness would be all the Crown Attorneys looking like they’d been forced to eat a shit sandwich.

      Having said this, it is only with widespread civil unrest that any alternative would be acceptable in Canada, and I’m not saying that was off the table, but Canada isn’t there, yet.

      I think Canada’s Constitution and The Charter is a POS not worth fighting for. I do think separation of AB/Sask. is the goal and worth “fighting for”. (not in an insurrection type of way, yet)

    3. The NDP would screw themselves into the ceiling if Smith talked to the Crown Attorneys about it. The Crown Attorneys should act on their own.

  37. Remember, it wasn’t just Hag Freeland, Fag Justhtin and the other POS cabinet members.
    Big Biz, Big Banks, Big Bureaucrats and a pantload of others were all screaming, “Do Something!”

    And the majority of Canadians are unapologetic authoritarians and will not be happy with this decision even if they knew that it had become a moot point.

    The odds are quite good that your smiling (city) neighbor would assume you were guilty if the jackboots showed up in the wee hours, broke down your door, shot your dog and dragged you out on your front lawn and beat you into a coma.

    1. “And the majority of Canadians are unapologetic authoritarians …”

      Import turd world, become turd world.

  39. I am sure all those valiant police officers who so enthusiastically brutalized protesters on behalf of their political masters, feel real bad about their actions now. Sure they do.

  40. Trudeau et al. knew the Covid gravy train was coming to a end.. So did the people behind the Freedom Convoy.. Trudeau wanted to end it on his own terms.. So did the Freedom Convoy..

    The pandemic (spit) was already over while this was playing out.. The powers that be had to maintain control to ensure a proper cover up .. Nobody else was allowed at that corrupt table.. Let them decide when it ends and they might ask about the beginning and everything in between..

    Again, it was over 6 weeks later, like it never happened.. And the people still in jail have to be criminals for the politicians to be innocent.. Our injustice system is a disgrace.. They are corrupt..

  41. Liberals are not answerable to parliament or courts, just Soros and Schwab. They will give the court the middle finger and if that judge is smart he will get some good home security, very good. And watch his bank account.

    The fraulein has already announced that Liberals cannot be in error, so the court must be wrong. It’s a natural law. Cancel culture is about to visit this judge, count on it.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation